CCMIN101513 - Laserfiche WebLink

The north-south spine extends through the residential neighborhood up to either a 12 acre community park or a potential 7-acre school site and neighborhood park combined. Unlike the version last reviewed by the Council, this alternative does not replace the City's Operations Services Center (OSC) with residential development but does relocate the transfer station to the industrial section of the plan area and moves the school further north to be combined with the community park. Vice-Mayor Cook-Kallio said she was under the impression the lakes would not be accessible. She noted several symbols on the diagram near Cope Lake indicating a staging area and something else. Mr. Rasmussen explained that the "S" indicates a staging area and the arrow indicates the direction of key views, not a water amenity. He noted a number of each scattered throughout this portion of the plan area which is designed to complement to the more robust trails system being proposed. Councilmember Pentin asked and Mr. Rasmussen confirmed that Cope Lake's water levels are extremely variable and it is generally not full. Councilmember Narum requested clarification on the Airport Protection Area. Mr. Rasmussen demonstrated its boundaries on the map, noting that this zone relates only to protection of residents from noise and does not relate to safety. While residential development is not allowed in this area, parks, schools, and commercial uses are permitted. Councilmember Brown asked whether the task force felt it acceptable to locate an office campus immediately adjacent to a school. Mr. Rasmussen confirmed. At the last task force meeting, the district provided a memo indicating it would like the city to preserve a school site within the planning area but did not provide details as to where it should be. He explained that the currently proposed location is, like Mohr Elementary, in an area that would otherwise be publicly owned by the city rather than residential area where it could perhaps cause issues with infrastructure funding and residential densities. Councilmember Brown noted that Mohr is surrounded by residential, not office, uses. She asked and Mr. Rasmussen confirmed that Lakes H and I do not permit human contact. Councilmember Brown asked how the city intends to address the uses, which include the transfer station, industrial uses and medium-density residential housing that are proposed outside of the city's Urban Growth Boundary. Mr. Fialho explained that the Urban Growth Boundary was approved by Pleasanton voters in the early 1990s through Measure FF. FF generally states that any extension of infrastructure to urban areas beyond the boundary would require an amendment of the boundary by the voters. FF does allow for some minor adjustments, such as road infrastructure, to be approved by the Council following a public hearing. An extension of the boundary to service residential, light industrial or commercial and office uses would require an amendment by the public. Mr. Dolan noted that there is a distinction between minor and major amendments and the criteria under which a minor adjustment can be made. He offered to provide this information to the Council. Councilmember Brown noted that the actual language of FF does not state the clarifiers that staff is now referencing. Alternative 1 This alternative proposes the fewest number of total housing units (1,000) with a 50/50 mix of single and multi-family residential units. This alternative is also distinguished by a private greenbelt extending City Council Minutes Page 4 of 13 October 15,2013